might be true, but I thought that Canon's EF-S lenses also had a white alignment dot near the mount as opposed to the red one pictured. The apparent build quality looks more like it'd be for the EF mount to me as well. but then again, I could easily be mistaken.

...we don't see anything in these images that makes me believe it is in fact a 2.8. ...

Based on the picture, the front element appears to be 75% of the size of the 58mm filter thread (~43mm diameter front element)

Compared to the existing 28mm f/2.8 which appears to be 70% of the smaller 52mm filter thread (~36mm diameter), it does seem to be indicative of a f/2.5 or f/2.2 for the new lens (42% larger area of front element).

EDIT: Additionally, using the same method of calculation the existing 28mm f/1.8 USM appears to have a 48mm element inside a 58mm filter thread (~82%).

...we don't see anything in these images that makes me believe it is in fact a 2.8. ...

Based on the picture, the front element appears to be 75% of the size of the 58mm filter thread (~43mm diameter front element)

Compared to the existing 28mm f/2.8 which appears to be 70% of the smaller 52mm filter thread (~36mm diameter), it does seem to be indicative of a f/2.5 or f/2.2 for the new lens (42% larger area of front element).

EDIT: Additionally, using the same method of calculation the existing 28mm f/1.8 USM appears to have a 48mm element inside a 58mm filter thread (~82%).

that is indeed a decent way to make the connection, I know that length and other variables can also factor in the equation so I will keep my hopes up. but as you have put, it seems that 2.8 is indeed a fair assumption for the time being.

hey, hope im wrong but imo the "24mm" and "28mm" is done is post, on blured ground. the structure of the lens should be visible the same as below/above - it isnt. besides, 24mm/28mm 2.8 with IS makes no sense whatever. the jpgs have embedded paths, which lookalike definitions of rendered lenses. and yeah both fonts look strange.JB

cx1

hey, hope im wrong but imo the "24mm" and "28mm" is done is post, on blured ground. the structure of the lens should be visible the same as below/above - it isnt. besides, 24mm/28mm 2.8 with IS makes no sense whatever. the jpgs have embedded paths, which lookalike definitions of rendered lenses. and yeah both fonts look strange.JB

I wouldnt say that stange, the two existing 2.8 primes at those focal lenghts didnt look to be selling well at all compaired to say the 35mm f/2 or the 50mm f/1.4.

Adding IS and potentially focusing on better performance at 2.8 does also allow them to seperate the market from the L's.

+1 on that. You can also search for wide primes like Leica or Nikkor, they also have 28 f/2.8 or 20 f/2.8 (without IS). I don't find it strange - especially combined with IS and capabilities of FF at high ISOs. And sure - they can now separate them from L's and still retain profit from them. If you really need fast lens - just look at 24 f/1.4L II.

Hope that RRP 800$ and 24 f/2.8 IS USM RRP 850$ will be around 700$ as street price.

SnapHappy

Is the MSRP really $850 (for the 24) and $800 (for the 28)? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. I don't think I'd be a buyer at even half those prices.

I agree with you completely. No way would I spend that on a 2.8 prime. If those turn out to be actual retail prices from Canon then I'll be really disappointed and it would be just another example of Canon's arrogance. I am getting tired of Canon's pricing when you look at the offerings from other makers. Canon are so much like Apple it's sickening.

Hopefully this is just the beginning of the refresh and we have a 35/2.0 28/1.8 USM IS coming our way.

Is the MSRP really $850 (for the 24) and $800 (for the 28)? I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. I don't think I'd be a buyer at even half those prices.

I agree with you completely. No way would I spend that on a 2.8 prime. If those turn out to be actual retail prices from Canon then I'll be really disappointed and it would be just another example of Canon's arrogance. I am getting tired of Canon's pricing when you look at the offerings from other makers. Canon are so much like Apple it's sickening.

Hopefully this is just the beginning of the refresh and we have a 35/2.0 28/1.8 USM IS coming our way.

me as well. there is no way I'm shelling out more than what you'd pay for a 50mm f/1.4 just to get an f/2.8 max aperture ... on a prime! it's bizarre and very frustrating. however, Sigma has been improving their lens quality (still nowhere close to L-series glass) so I'll be waiting to see if they take advantage of this opening in the FF prime lens market. $800 for an f/2.8 wide prime? really appalling. it's not like this is a new 200mm f/2.8 IS we're talking about here.